Hi Steve,
Thanks for the kind words!
To address your later point first: I don't have any particular user groups in
mind. My suggestion stems in part from my own experience as an occasional local
concert attendee, and I would be very interested to develop the ideas with you
and others who have more relevant experience. On reflection, it seems to me
that engaging with amateur musicians would be an easier place to start than with
the professionals I had envisaged.
My own focus here is in prototyping and developing the information exchange
models and their representation using Semantic Web standards. I am working on a
software tool (an early version demoed at the FAST kick-off meeting last year)
that may help with prototyping the information models, and might be a useful
stepping stone, but I don't particularly see it playing out as a long term
interface for real users.
The most relevant thing I have to show you at the moment is this:
http://demo.annalist.net/annalist/c/DMO_Experiment/d/ - the underling platform
is designed for flexibility and evolvability, so I'm hoping it will prove useful
for prototyping DMO information model ideas that we may wish to develop.
On the technology front, I would anticipate an approach that is kind of hybrid
between your "new platform" vs "dashboard" approaches. I think it's important
to not try to supplant existing applications that already work well for their
users, but I also anticipate that there may be features that are not provided
effectively by existing platforms. I see the Web as the ultimate underlying
platform for all of this, and Web standards providing some of the glue that can
connect new and existing applications. I don't personally have a clear idea of
what those new and existing applications might be, so there's lots to discuss.
I think a chat or meeting would be great. I'm currently travelling with patchy
Internet access, but shall be available to Skype for most of next week. Also,
I'm currently looking to see if I can make the June workshop in Nottingham -- if
I can make it, would it make sense to plan on staying over a night and meeting
on the Tuesday?
#g
--
On 14/05/2015 09:31, Steve Benford wrote:
> Hi Graham - like Natasa, I think that your proposal is spot on and offers a great way for us to approach DMOs.
>
> I agree that there is potential here to connect to the previous study from CHI 2014 of amateur musicians that Natasa emailed through. Michaela Hoare has been continuing this line of study in her subsequent PhD by working with a DIY music community based in Sneinton, Nottingham.
> Indeed, there is a fair chance that we could engage this community as co-designers and/or users in the project. Another possibility might be to engage with the OxJam series of festivals throughout the UK where we also have good contacts.
> However, I appreciate that you may already have user groups in mind.
>
> So would be very keen to explore how we might get involved in this. Perhaps a Skype or even meeting soon? Would be good to involve Max, myself, Michaela and Chris Greenhalgh from Nottingham.
>
> Cheers
> Steve
>
>
>
>
> On 10 May 2015, at 15:35, Natasa Milic-Frayling wrote:
>
>> Graham,
>> The demonstrator system of the "Performance DMO" work that you propose is a great idea -- of course, I would say that because Steve Benford, his students and my team have done research in that direction for the past 2 years :-) The focus was not on DMO but on the experiences of amateur musicians. However, addressing the DMO issue is inevitable when creating a working prototype.
>>
>> We have considered two possible approaches:
>> - creating a (new, dedicated) platform for amateur musicians
>> OR
>> - creating a dashboard for connecting existing services that musician use in their practices (e.g., Facebook, Twitter, band websites, band's media sharing facilities - Dropbox, local media storage - across personal devices and offline storage, etc.).
>> On top of that, one can begin to invent additional mechanisms for engagement in the form of apps, to support all the phases of musicians' performing activities.
>>
>> Here 'performing' refers to various aspects of the artists' engagement,
>> - from coordination of activities and realization of ideas with fellow musicians,
>> - to networking with stakeholders in the music scene (venue organizers, event promoters, creatives who produce and sell 'memorabilia', etc.)
>> - to communicating with FFFans (family, friends, and fans) who comprise the amateurs' target audience.
>>
>> The question 'what DMO is' is then pragmatically resolved based on the requirements of the use scenarios and the specification of the system. There is no guarantee that such a DMO will be useful in other scenarios but as long as we ensure that the model and the supporting architecture are extendible, we will be in good shape.
>>
>> Steve and I can share information about the analyses of musicians' online activities and the mock-ups of specific applications we've considered for connecting with fans and fellow musicians. Since there are several layers to implement, we can then discuss the overall architecture and the division of work.
>>
>> Some of this research has been published in the CHI 2014 paper (enclosed). More detailed data analysis and prototypes are work in progress, started last summer and not yet published.
>>
>> Natasa
>>
>> Natasa Milic-Frayling - Principal Researcher - Microsoft Research Cambridge UK - Tel: +44 1223 479 772
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Announcement list for FAST IMPACt [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Graham Klyne
>> Sent: 10 May 2015 12:35
>> To: [log in to unmask]
>> Subject: Re: digital music object
>>
>> On 08/05/2015 11:35, Mark Sandler wrote:
>>> with thanks to max wilson and apologies for sitting on this for so longâ¦.
>>>
>>> max came up with the attached sketch/concept for DMOs at the oxford meeting.
>>>
>>> iâve been meaning to share it for too long. we should use it to shape our ideas.
>>>
>>> thanks max
>>
>> It just happens that I recently circulated a rough proposal for a DMO demonstrator to my Oxford colleagues, which I think meshes with the ideas that have been raised here in response to Max's thoughts. Having been through some of these debates in the context of Research Objects (which arguably serve a similar role in research activity that DMOs serve for musical activity), I think it is helpful if we can talk in terms on concrete proposals rather than abstract descriptions, which I think it is very easy for people to interpret in ways that reflect what they expect to hear.
>>
>> I also note that the project has been described as intending to proceed by way of demonstrations which can allow us to explore and develop our ideas. In this spirit, I offer my suggestion more widely, with the following caveats and comments:
>>
>> 1. It's just a rough idea at this stage, not something that has been worked out in great detail.
>> 2. It's a personal suggestion, and doesn't represent the views of my Oxford colleagues.
>> 3. It is of limited scope w.r.t. the range of research proposed for FAST, but even so I think it illustrates points raised by Max about having "different value to different people", and also by Natasa that "digital media â content files" (though not necessarily developing in the same direction).
>>
>> ...
>>
>> So here is what I suggest as one possible DMO demonstrator:
>>
>> # "Performance DMO" demonstrator proposal
>>
>> I understand that Digital Music Objects (DMOs) act as a kind of "glue" layer to pull together other aspects of the project. The "Performance DMO" is a suggestion to demonstrate such "glue" capabilities.
>>
>> The "Performance DMO" was discussed in the brainstorming breakout session I attended at the FAST all hands meeting (not using that name), but was not presented as it was seen as being more complex to implement than the option our group eventually presented. The group was tasked with coming up with ideas relating to musical performance, and the underlying idea was a suggestion for using digital technology to create a richer, less ephemeral connection between performers and their audiences.
>>
>> This proposal is informed in part by my experiences of attending concerts by less well-known musicians, often given by ensembles of 1-5 performers and held in smaller local venues with an audience size in the range of 100-300 (e.g.
>> Nettlebed Folk Club, Abingdon's Unicorn Theatre, Oxford's Holywell Music Room).
>> These performances are often given as part of a tour of 10-30 dates within a period of a couple of months or so. Because these performances are relatively easy and inexpensive to access, I have often seen performers whose works I had very little prior exposure to. The performers themselves seem to be using the concerts in part to promote themselves and their work. Thus, I posit there is a desire on both sides to create a deeper connection between the performers and audiences.
>>
>>
>> ## User stories
>>
>> 1. As an attendee of concerts by little-known musicians and bands, I would like to have access to information and recordings related to a performance I have attended so that I can further explore the music and its associations, with a view to possible purchase of recordings by the performers seen, or attending further performances by them.
>>
>> 2. As a "small-time" or "up-and-coming" performing professional musician, I would like to create a longer-lasting connection with the audiences who attend my performances, and encourage them to purchase recordings of my music or attend further performances.
>>
>>
>> ## The proposal
>>
>> Imagine that performance tickets are printed with (say) a QR code that links to an online resource that is a Digital Music Object. Or, if concert bookings are processed online, an "e-ticket" could be a document that links to such an object. The exact mechanism is not important, but I imagine it being integrated with the purchase and distribution of performance tickets. The key is that each attendee receives a personal link or token that can be used online to access a Digital Music Object.
>>
>> What does this DMO offer? It could be like a personalised version of the performers' general web site, offering direct access to information and recordings that relate directly to the performance attended. Here are some
>> possibilities:
>> - link to a downloadable and/or purchasable live recording of the performance attended (a kind of "official bootleg"?)
>> - a set list for the performance attended,
>> - for each composition on the set list, links to more detailed information; e.g., composer, performers and instruments, recording and performance history of the composition, information about variations, downloadable and/or purchasable recordings, sheet music, etc.
>> - more detailed information about the performers seen (recordings, compositions, other associations, links to other ensembles with which they have performed, etc.).
>> - "family tree" for the ensemble seen (past members, past recordings and general history).
>> - future performances by the performers seen
>> - future recordings to be released by the performers seen
>> - links to critical and/or scholarly reviews of the performance and performers' work
>> - sharable links to music samples that audience members can use to recommend the performers to their friends, etc.
>> - links to details of instruments used,
>> - links to settings used for keyboards, sound processing equipment, etc.
>>
>> The online Digital Music Object could further be a dynamic entity, providing updated information about performers' future activities as and when they become known, or providing time-limited access to downloadable recordings. It might also provide links to social networking features that would allow performance attendees to communicate with each other and/or the performers about their experience of and thoughts about the performance and related material. Links might be provided to Wikipedia-like resources that can be used for crowdsourcing reviews of performances.
>>
>>
>> ## Technical outline
>>
>> Most of the Digital Music Object resources offered are based on existing technologies and platforms. The "Performance DMO" would mainly be an aggregation of basic information and references to resources. I expect we would build upon ideas developed for Research Objects (Linked data, ORE, annotations, etc.).
>>
>>
>> ## Minimum viable product
>>
>> I see a minimal viable product for a "Performance DMO" consisting of something like:
>>
>> 1. overview of the performance (who, where, when) 2. a list of compositions performed (title, composer, performers, etc.) 3. some feedback mechanism to allow audience feedback to the performers - this might be as simple as a "like" button, or allow more nuanced forms of feedback.
>> The DMO content might just be a (personalised?) link to an existing service.
>>
>> ...
>>
>> Does something like this reflect any of the capabilities that people are expecting to be addressed by DMOs?
>>
>> #g
>> <Coming in from the Margins CHI2014 final.pdf>
>
>
>
>
>
> This message and any attachment are intended solely for the addressee
> and may contain confidential information. If you have received this
> message in error, please send it back to me, and immediately delete it.
>
> Please do not use, copy or disclose the information contained in this
> message or in any attachment. Any views or opinions expressed by the
> author of this email do not necessarily reflect the views of the
> University of Nottingham.
>
> This message has been checked for viruses but the contents of an
> attachment may still contain software viruses which could damage your
> computer system, you are advised to perform your own checks. Email
> communications with the University of Nottingham may be monitored as
> permitted by UK legislation.
>
>
|
